9 comments:

more important than the record, we didn't have that many "starters" leave for the draft this year, and the ones that did weren't standouts.

we had about 3 offensive players that were consistently in the line up (and Massaquoi was hurt most of the season) eligible. we had 4 from the D, and of those, most of the LB/DL players rotated a lot throughout the year. we had some good guys finish up this fall, but w/ the exception of Avant, none of them came close to being stars.

on the other hand, while you always like to see kids go on to bigger & better things, having a whole lot in one draft can't be a good thing. not to name names, but i wouldn't want my team to have to replace 9 starters on D, our best receiver, and our two best O- linemen all at the same time. i don't care HOW much talent you THINK is sitting on the bench, that won't be easy.

tOSU will likely be very good this year. But edging a Michigan team with a congenital aversion to late-game success (a team, we are reminded and regualarly remind ourselves was 7-5) and pounding a solid but unspectacular Notre Dame game in the Fiesta Bowl does not make the Buckeyes an automatic powerhouse in 2006.

Far more relevant to their prospects for the upcoming season is the fact you mention: they lost 9 defensive starters, including their entire LB corps and three DBs. I suspect they have talented players to replace those who have departed. But those players will be inexperienced.

Of course, tOSU will still have Smith and Ginn, who rank among the most dangerous offensive weapons in the country. My early prediction for them is 9-3.

Instead of gloating how they had so many players drafted in early rounds and we had so few drafted overall, Buckeye fans should be asking why they couldn't win the Big 10 and why they struggled so much with 7-5 Michigan and the sub-.500 Sparty.

Maybe this is just because this is my first year in the college football blogsphere, but I can’t recall anyone, anywhere ever using one NFL draft as some sort of indicator of future performance for a school’s football program. Is the rending of garments and gnashing of teeth over Michigan’s poor showing in the draft—not that I’ve read much from actual Michigan fans—simply the result of the internet, ESPN’s coverage of the draft, just having too much time on our hands, or some combination of the above?

And since when did having players drafted become a competition? Players getting drafted means they’re LEAVING. Congratulations Ohio State, you’ve just lost five athletes who were so good they were picked in the first round, good luck next year without them.

Yes, putting athletes into the NFL is one goal of any good football program and any school that does that is going to attract top quality recruits, yeah, yeah, yeah I get it, but the draft is just another gauge for LAST season. And we already know more than we ever need to about last season.

I’m willing to bet that if you go back to past drafts and look at schools that lost a lot of starters with several players going in the first or second round, they posted a worse record the following season. And, I bet if you look at schools that lost only a few starters with none going in the first or second round, they posted a better record the following year. I’d look this up myself, but I’m too lazy, er, busy to do it.

for a Buckeye team that had, in OSU standards, a mediocre season, having a fair number of drafted players really speaks to player development in regards to the NFL.

for a true bluechip recruit/prospect this should speak volumes. these kids' long term dream isn't to bust their butt on the field, live on next to no $$$ and try to keep up w/ their studies....it's to get drafted and make a better life for themselves.

A.J. Hawk, for example. not a super highly touted recruit coming into CF. hard work & player development got him PAID!!

so there IS something to this - just not the obvious.

if you think that recruits are not taking note of this YOU ARE CRAZY - CRAZY & BLIND. would be perfectly fine with me if the powers @ UM take the same stance. fine with me.

Anon,simple question- was or was not Michigan national champion in '97?

tosu fans can't have it both ways. everytime the '97 championship arises over a beer here in cowtown, some ass starts spouting off on how we weren't really champions because of the poll split w/ nebraska, etc., ad nauseum.

now tosu hasn't won an outright conference championship in 20 years, including last season. of course, i haven't seen any tosu t-shirts proclaiming you guys as 2005 conference "co" champions. they all just say "big 10 Champions".

and you know what? i'm fine w/ that. just like we were '97 national champions. let's just agree that everyone gets to drop the "co" and move on?

Follow the MZone

Subscribe To

The MZone-slash-MichiganZone.net-slash-MichiganZone.blogspot.com is in no way affiliated with the University of Michigan and/or U-M football in any way. If you thought it was, frankly I'm surprised you know how to use a computer.